League Champions!

Discuss anything you like about chess related matters in this forum.
Geoff Chandler
Posts: 3486
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 1:36 pm
Location: Under Cover

Re: League Champions!

Post by Geoff Chandler » Sat Jun 01, 2013 4:19 am

Hi Andrew.

"Geoff I have found a lot of your comments amusing and good value but not this one."

Well I am what I am. (though no insult to you was intended just the adjudication system in general.)

It's how I waded in at the Edinburgh AGM all those years ago stating the game
should be between the players and this adjournment and adudication farce be stopped.

Players hit the required move number and stop. The game is then taken over by a third party.
This forum enjoys comparing Chess with other sports. What other sport has this method of deciding a game.
Tag Wresting comes to mind but even then the orginal two players are allowed back into the ring.

In some cases, and don't tell me this has never happened, players stop playing the game and
shuggle about a miserable pawn up to hit the magic move number knowing that another player
is going to win it for them.
They have brought in 110 rules (exageration for effect ) to stop you doing this in OTB play
when one lad is in time trouble but in adjuducation rules this is allowed.

I said:" "How many players out there have a boosted grade based on game won for them."
Not "How many other players...." so it was not aimed at you Andrew.

But it not right that a player receives a grading bonus for game he did not win in his own right.
A win under these circumstance should be classed as a default.
And yes the flaw is that in that case all players would never resign and go to extraordinary
lengths to avoid being mated before the magic move number so they don't lose GP's.
Good. Maybe then everyone will see what a complete nonsense this adjudcation farce is.

Every league secretary (and I was one for two years) will agree.
These things hold up publishing up to date league tables and are a right headache.
In this case everyone is waiting to find out who won the league weeks after the
last pawn was pushed. How absurd is that?

We (once a league sec always a league sec.) do this job unpaid have some consideration.

Hmmm...Let's have a re-read at my original post. What have I done now?

"No wonder the Herts league is so strong. None of them have to play any end games!"
That was a tossed in joke. I hate endgames, if I had someone to play them for me I'd be a GM.

The original post on this matter is not harsh, it's me ruffling feathers.

You need to get this sorted at the next AGM.

I would not go cap in hand at your AGM asking please can we abolish Adjudications/adjournments.
I'd kick up the dust, rant and rave, point fingers, howl foul play from the roof tops.
Never threaten to leave the league but do go in armed with other clubs on your side.
Let democracy conquer this medieval method of deciding a game of chess.

I'd really like to wish you good luck in that adjudicated game but I can't.
Luck is going to play no part in it at all. What you and your opponent started will now get
polished up into an exact piece of calculation. It's not your or your opponents game anymore.
Neither of you could reach a decision in the allocated number of moves on the night so the game
is taken off you. So what was the point in this 80 mile round trip? (use that argument at your AGM.)

I have never been awarded a win on adjudication. I would never accept a win under these circumstances.
If I was winning and the game was stopped I could never insist that my opponent resigns.
Basically by allowing the game to go adjudication this is what players in the better position are doing.
Insisting that a player resigns. Nowhere in the FIDE rule book does it say a player MUST RESIGN.
The choice of the player getting beat always has the privilege of deciding when the game ends.
Allowing a game to go for adjudication is an insult to the game, demeaning it.
It is not how the game was intended to be played.

Use that statement at your AGM. The final act being to go nose to nose with the
President of the league accusing him and his league guilty of desecrating the sacred game of Chess.

(You must let know how you get on at this AGM.)

All unfinished games of chess are drawn. (and nobody gets any grading points.)

Richard Bates
Posts: 3338
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2008 8:27 pm

Re: League Champions!

Post by Richard Bates » Sat Jun 01, 2013 7:26 am

Geoff Chandler wrote: Players hit the required move number and stop. The game is then taken over by a third party.
This forum enjoys comparing Chess with other sports. What other sport has this method of deciding a game.
Tag Wresting comes to mind but even then the orginal two players are allowed back into the ring.
Boxing? Judo? Basically any sport which has a "knockout" result (aka "checkmate"), but defaults to a 'points' score if not finished in a set period.

Andrew Stone
Posts: 141
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2011 11:13 am

Re: League Champions!

Post by Andrew Stone » Sat Jun 01, 2013 8:17 am

Geoff,

Looks like I got caught in the crossfire of your anti-adjudication feelings. Oh well so be it. You are what you are as you say. Let's just move on- the forum doesn't need yet more people conducting private battles! I have some sympathy with your views, although I also have some sympathy with people who are against quickplays also. There are an awful lot of anti quickplay finishers in the Herts League so I would be surprised if your preferred method of choice came in soon. It is in place for the Herts Cup though (which Watford also won this year). One thing that shouldn't be overlooked is that many games reach their natural conclusion by the end of play first time around and that for every artificial result I have had in the Herts League, I have had 5-10 games that have been able to be of slightly better quality due to a timelimit of 35 in 75 mins rather than the very rushed all moves in 80 mins.
By the way if my calculations are correct, if I lose my final two games of the season (assuming the Scottish (Open) is either too late or not going to be graded) if my calculations are correct, then I will be relying on getting an adjudication win to achieve a new grading high. I am sure you will be the first to congratulate me on this achievement if indeed it does go in my favour :lol:

John Hodgson
Posts: 73
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 10:13 am

Re: League Champions!

Post by John Hodgson » Sat Jun 01, 2013 8:57 am

Geoff Chandler wrote: I'd kick up the dust, rant and rave, point fingers, howl foul play from the roof tops.
Some people consider the quick-play/adjournment debate to be a complicated one, with good arguments and valid concerns on both sides.

Others have extreme opinions, and wear them as a badge of honour.

Brian Judkins
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri May 31, 2013 7:39 pm

Re: League Champions!

Post by Brian Judkins » Sat Jun 01, 2013 9:37 am

Agree with what John has just said. I would point out in Herts that both players have to agree to adjudication for it to happen. Out of ca 1500 games played this last season, 6 have ended up with adjudicators (0.4%). I think in Herts the resistance to changing over completely to finishing on the night is due to the all in 80mins limit - if they could be persuaded to start earlier and have a longer session that would be the way forward.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21301
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: League Champions!

Post by Roger de Coverly » Sat Jun 01, 2013 9:56 am

Brian Judkins wrote: Out of ca 1500 games played this last season, 6 have ended up with adjudicators (0.4%).
Arguably that's a false statistic since it only tells you about adjudications where a result could not be agreed between the players. The more important statistic is the number of games where adjudication is agreed as the method of finishing. In the days when games were adjudicated, it used to affect choice of openings and moves. If the game is going to finish at move 35, playing 20 moves of theory in a game you hope to win leaves your opponent with just 15 moves to survive. Equally sacrificing at move 30 is foolhardy.

(edit) I see Herts also have the tactical adjudication option. That's where it's uncertain when the game starts as to how and where it will be finished. So if you suspect your opponent will be obliged to adjourn, you offer an adjudication at the end of the session to force him to travel. A gamble of sorts, naturally, since he might accept. Also if the position is level for the moment, but adjourning would need an ending to be held, you offer adjudication particularly if your opponent is unable or unwilling to travel. (/edit)

Brian Judkins wrote:I think in Herts the resistance to changing over completely to finishing on the night is due to the all in 80mins limit - if they could be persuaded to start earlier and have a longer session that would be the way forward.
I struggle to understand why you have all in 80 if your clubs can accommodate three hour sessions. In neighbouring Bucks, we've used 35/75 + 15 for over ten years. Berks uses 30/75 + 15 or G/90 if the players prefer.

No one has ever tried it, but you could move the adjudication point to move 60, so play 60 moves in 90 minutes. That at least flushes out objectors who are unable to play quickly. For many games, they would be played at the same tempo as a QP finish with the difference that 10.2 isn't directly available, but an equivalent comes into force at move 60.

Mick Norris
Posts: 10329
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester

Re: League Champions!

Post by Mick Norris » Sat Jun 01, 2013 11:15 am

Brian Judkins wrote: I think in Herts the resistance to changing over completely to finishing on the night is due to the all in 80 mins limit
Interesting, what is the start time? 80 mins all in seems a strange time to use
Any postings on here represent my personal views

Brian Judkins
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri May 31, 2013 7:39 pm

Re: League Champions!

Post by Brian Judkins » Sat Jun 01, 2013 11:55 am

Mick, start is 19:45, too late in my opinion, but there seems to be resistance to starting earlier. A 19:30 start (like all the neighbouring counties) would enable a three hour session to be accommodated more easily. I do find the all in 80mins is too quick - in Cambs the extra 10mins available does help for a better game. I would prefer increments but the availability of digital clocks could be an issue at some clubs

Finally going back on topic congratulations to Watford for doing the league/cup double. They fought off a very strong challenge from Hertford who won the previous season

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21301
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: League Champions!

Post by Roger de Coverly » Sat Jun 01, 2013 12:10 pm

Brian Judkins wrote:Mick, start is 19:45, too late in my opinion, but there seems to be resistance to starting earlier. A 19:30 start (like all the neighbouring counties) would enable a three hour session to be accommodated more easily.
The G/80 makes more sense. It's really G/75 but with the ten minutes used for adjournment/adjudication wrangling added back to the playing time. But it would be better to get clubs to agree to an earlier start and have a three hour playing session instead of two and a half.

Geoff Chandler
Posts: 3486
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 1:36 pm
Location: Under Cover

Re: League Champions!

Post by Geoff Chandler » Sat Jun 01, 2013 1:37 pm

Hi Andrew

Let's just move on- the forum doesn't need yet more people conducting private battles!

I don't do private battles v individuals, a minor skirmish then it's forgotten.

Hi John,

"Others have extreme opinions, and wear them as a badge of honour."

Badges.......Badges.....I'm covered in blood red tattoos!

I think it's important to let people know where you stand so there can be no mis-understanding.
I've never get piles from sitting on a fence. (.....how does one catch piles, or do they just happen?)

Hi Richard

"Boxing? Judo? Basically any sport which has a "knockout" result (aka "checkmate"),.."

In Boxing and Judo the judges decide the winner on points scored during the match.
If the judges are split the referee decides.
They do not bring into the ring two better fighters and a computer to finish the fight for them.

If you want the game decided on points (the Pawn=1 Rooks =5 method)
Then I bags to go Black in every game and on my very last move before adjudication
I'll toss my Queen at a Rook and net 5 unassailable points.

It's quite simple. You reach move 36 in 1½ hours, add on 15 minutes.
Mate, flag fall, resignation or agreed draw ends the game with no outside nterference at all.
The game is over that night, it takes 3½ hours max, no travelling all over the place.
(think of your carbon foot print, if I have to drag The Green Party into this then I will.
I'll have them parading through the streets of London demanding an end to adjudications and adjournments.)
Last edited by Geoff Chandler on Sat Jun 01, 2013 3:45 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21301
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: League Champions!

Post by Roger de Coverly » Sat Jun 01, 2013 1:52 pm

Geoff Chandler wrote: In Boxing and Judo the judges decide the winner on points scored during the match.
Duckworth-Lewis in one day cricket can be a form of adjudication. The game is unfinished because of insufficient time and a formula based on the match position is used to determine a winner.
Geoff Chandler wrote:It's quite simple. You reach move 36 in 1½ hours, add on 15 minutes.
With digital clocks programmed not to tell you how much time is left for an arbitrary period after 36 moves, I'd prefer G/105. You seem to play a little slower at the cost of more last five minute clock bashing.

Geoff Chandler
Posts: 3486
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 1:36 pm
Location: Under Cover

Re: League Champions!

Post by Geoff Chandler » Sat Jun 01, 2013 2:24 pm

HI Roger.

"Duckworth-Lewis in one day cricket can be a form of adjudication..."

The cricket game was originally intended to play a finish that day.
The Duckworth-Lewis is brought in because of rain/bad light stopped play not because
a certain amount of overs had been bowled and neither side has been bowled out.

They do not wait two days till things brighten up and then field two entirely different and stronger
teams to finish the game taking over from the score as it stood when the game was stopped.
That is what happens in chess and adjudications.

Anyone played in a match that was interupted due to power cuts, (or fighting.)
Were all the boards adjudicated?
Are the matches not declared void (agreed drawn) or replayed from scratch.

Matt Fletcher
Posts: 271
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2011 9:42 pm

Re: League Champions!

Post by Matt Fletcher » Sat Jun 01, 2013 10:32 pm

Brian Judkins wrote:Finally going back on topic congratulations to Watford for doing the league/cup double. They fought off a very strong challenge from Hertford who won the previous season
Congratulations to Watford, the league looks like it was very close. But it wasn't Hertford in the cup - somehow we (Letchworth) managed to knock them over in the first round although we did lose in the semi-final! We also won the 3rd division with a game to spare, so back up to the 2nd next year :)

PS Geoff you will be pleased to hear I didn't have an adjudication all season :mrgreen: - I did have a possible adjournment but my opponent resigned before resumption (the position was hopeless without needing computer analysis)

User avatar
Joey Stewart
Posts: 1860
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 2:35 pm
Location: All Of Them

Re: League Champions!

Post by Joey Stewart » Mon Jun 03, 2013 1:35 pm

Richard Bates wrote:
Geoff Chandler wrote: Players hit the required move number and stop. The game is then taken over by a third party.
This forum enjoys comparing Chess with other sports. What other sport has this method of deciding a game.
Tag Wresting comes to mind but even then the orginal two players are allowed back into the ring.
Boxing? Judo? Basically any sport which has a "knockout" result (aka "checkmate"), but defaults to a 'points' score if not finished in a set period.
The equivalent of adjudication here would be to allow a black belt to go a round with each player immediately after the fight ended and see who was left standing.
Lose one queen and it is a disaster, Lose 1000 queens and it is just a statistic.

Dragoljub Sudar
Posts: 165
Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 10:34 pm

Re: League Champions!

Post by Dragoljub Sudar » Wed Jun 05, 2013 4:19 pm

Congratulations to Geoff for his efforts to get rid of adjudication.

I've never understood why anyone thinks it's ok for someone else to decide who should win a game. With quickplay finishes, at least you know that only you and your opponent have been responsible for the result of your game.

I managed to get adjudication abolished in the mid 90s in Nottinghamshire by suggesting we had a one year trial when all games would have to be completed using quickplay finishes (up till then quickplay or adjudication was decided by a toss of coin if the players couldn't agree).
My proposal was narrowly passed (by 3 votes I think), however the following year only 3 people voted for the return of adjudication.

The biggest factor was players knowing the result of the match on the night rather than waiting for weeks (or months if there was an appeal to the original decision) and the records secretary was very happy as it saved him having to deal with about 30 adjudications each season.